Vested as a Bishop with phelonion and omophorion, and usually with his head covered in the manner of Egyptian monastics (sometimes the head covering has a polystavrion pattern), he usually is depicted holding a Gospel Book or a scroll, with his right hand raised in blessing.

Early life

Cyril was born about 376 in the small town of Theodosios, Egypt, near modern day El-Mahalla El-Kubra. A few years after his birth, his maternal uncle Theophilus rose to the powerful position of Patriarch of Alexandria. His mother remained close to her brother and under his guidance, St. Cyril was well educated. His education showed through his knowledge, in his writings, of Christian writers of his day, including Eusebius, Origen, Didymus, and writers of the Alexandrian church. He received the formal education standard for his day: he studied grammar from age twelve to fourteen (390-392), rhetoric and humanities from fifteen to twenty (393-397) and finally theology and biblical studies (398-402).

Patriarch of Alexandria

Persecution of the Novatians and Jews

Thus, Cyril followed his uncle in a position that had become powerful and influential, rivalling that of the prefect in a time of turmoil and frequently violent conflict between the cosmopolitan city's Pagan, Jewish, and Christian inhabitants.[3]

He began to exert his authority by causing the churches of the Novatians to be closed and their sacred vessels to be seized.

Orestes, Praefectus augustalis of the Diocese of Egypt, steadfastly resisted Cyril's agenda of ecclesiastical encroachment onto secular prerogatives.[4] In one occasion, Cyril sent the grammaticus Hierax to secretly discover the content of an edict that Orestes was to promulgate on the mimes shows, which attracted great crowds. When the Jews, with whom Cyril had clashed before, discovered the presence of Hierax, they broke in a riot, complaining that Hierax's presence was aimed at provoking them.[5] Then Orestes had Hierax tortured in public in a theatre. This order had two aims: the first was to sedate the riot, the other to mark Orestes' authority on Cyril.[6]

According to Christian sources, the Jews of Alexandria schemed against the Christians and killed many of them; Cyril reacted and expelled all of the Jews, or only the murderers, from Alexandria, actually exerting a power that belonged to the civil officer, Orestes.[7] Orestes was powerless, but nonetheless rejected Cyril's gesture of offering him a Bible, which would mean that the religious authority of Cyril would require Orestes' acquiescence about the bishop's policy.[8]

This refusal almost costed Orestes his life. Nitrian monks come from the desert and rose a riot against Orestes among the population of Alexandria. These monks' violence had been already used, 15 years before, by Theophilus (Cyril's uncle) against the "Tall Brothers"; furthermore, it is said that Cyril had had spent five years among them in ascetic training. The monks assaulted Orestes and accused him of being a pagan. Orestes rejected the accusations, showing that he had been baptised by the Archbishop of Constantinople. However, the monks were not satisfied, and one of them, Ammonius, throw a stone and hit Orestes on his head, and so much blood flowed out that he was covered in it. Orestes' guard, fearing to be stoned by the monks, fled leaving Orestes alone. The people of Alexandria, however, came in his help, captured Ammonius and put the monks to flight. Orestes was cured and put Ammonius under torture in a public place. The prefect then wrote to the emperor Theodosius II, telling him the events. Also Cyril wrote to the Emperor, telling his version of the facts. The bishop also seized the body of Ammonius and put it in a church, conferring upon him the title of Thaumasius and putting his name in the list of the martyrs. However, the Christian population of Alexandria knew that Ammonius had been killed for his assault and not for his faith, and Cyril was obliged to pass the events under silence.[9][10]

Murder of Hypatia

The Alexandrian philosopher and scientist Hypatia (detail of The School of Athens, by Raphael, Apostolic Palace, Rome, 1509-1510). Some Christians thought that Hypatia's influence had caused Orestes, the Praefectus augustalis of the Diocese of Egypt, to reject all reconciliatory offerings by Cyril. A group of Cyril's supporters killed her in the streets.

Prefect Orestes enjoyed the political backing of Hypatia, a pagan philosopher and scientist who had considerable moral authority in the city of Alexandria, and who had extensive influence. Indeed many students from wealthy and influential families came to Alexandria purposefully to study privately with Hypatia, and many of these later attained high posts in government and the Church. Several Christians thought that Hypatia's influence had caused Orestes to reject all reconciliatory offerings by Cyril. Modern historians think that Orestes had cultivated his relationship with Hypathia to strengthen a bond with the Pagan community of Alexandria, as he had done with the Jewish one, to handle better the difficult political life of the Egyptian capital.[11] A Christian mob possibly led by Nitrian monks, however, grabbed Hypatia out of her chariot and brutally murdered her, hacking her body apart and burning the pieces outside the city walls.[12][13]

Modern studies represent Hypatia's death as the result of a struggle between two Christian factions, the moderate Orestes, supported by Hypatia, and the more rigid Cyril.[14] According to lexicographer William Smith, "She was accused of too much familiarity with Orestes, prefect of Alexandria, and the charge spread among the clergy, who took up the notion that she interrupted the friendship of Orestes with their archbishop, Cyril."[15]

Orthodox Christian scholar John Anthony McGuckin states: "At this time Cyril is revealed as at the head of dangerously volatile forces: at their head, but not always in command of them."[16]

Conflict with Nestorius

Another major conflict was between the Alexandrian and Antiochian schools of ecclesiastical reflection, piety, and discourse. This long running conflict widened with the third canon of the First Council of Constantinople which granted the see of Constantinople primacy over the older sees of Alexandria and Antioch. Thus, the struggle between the sees of Alexandria and Antioch now included Constantinople. The conflict came to a head in 428 after Nestorius, who originated in Antioch, was made Archbishop of Constantinople.[17]

Cyril gained an opportunity to restore Alexandria's pre-eminence over both Antioch and Constantinople when an Antiochine priest who was in Constantinople at Nestorius' behest began to preach against calling Mary the "Mother of God". As the term "Mother of God" had long been attached to Mary, the laity in Constantinople complained against the priest. Rather than repudiating the priest, Nestorius intervened on his behalf. Nestorius argued that Mary was neither a "Mother of Man" nor "Mother of God" as these referred to Christ's two natures. Rather, Mary was the "Mother of Christ" which referred the unified person of Christ. This however only stoked the fires. Eusebius of Dorylaeum went so far as to accuse Nestorius of adoptionism. By this time, news of the controversy in the capital had reached Alexandria. At Easter 429 A.D., Cyril wrote a letter to the Egyptian monks warning them of Nestorius' views. A copy of this letter reached Constantinople where Nestorius preached a sermon against it. This began a series of letters between Cyril and Nestorius which gradually became more strident in tone. In retrospect it is obvious that both Patriarchs were as much interested in ecclesiastical politics as in the theology of the matter.[18] Finally, Emperor Theodosius II convoked a council in Ephesus to solve the dispute. Ephesus was friendly to Cyril[citation needed], Cyril and his supporters started and concluded the Council of Ephesus (in 431) before Nestorius and his supporters had even got there; predictably, the Council ordered the deposition and exile of Nestorius.

However, when John of Antioch and the other pro-Nestorius bishops finally reached Ephesus, they assembled their own Council, condemned Cyril for heresy, deposed him from his see, and labelled him as a monster, born and educated for the destruction of the church[19]. Theodosius, by now old enough to hold power by himself, annulled the verdict of the Council and arrested Cyril, but Cyril eventually escaped. Having fled to Egypt, Cyril bribed Theodosius' courtiers, and sent a mob lead by Dalmatius, a hermit, to besiege Theodosius' palace, and shout abuse; the Emperor eventually gave in, sending Nestorius into minor exile (Upper Egypt)[19]. The events created a major schism, forming the Church of the East.

Theology

Cyril regarded the embodiment of God in the person of Jesus Christ to be so mystically powerful that it spread out from the body of the God-man into the rest of the race, to reconstitute human nature into a graced and deified condition of the saints, one that promised immortality and transfiguration to believers. Nestorius, on the other hand, saw the incarnation as primarily a moral and ethical example to the faithful, to follow in the footsteps of Jesus. Cyril's constant stress was on the simple idea that it was God who walked the streets of Nazareth (hence Mary was Theotokos (Mother of God)), and God who had appeared in a transfigured humanity. Nestorius spoke of the distinct 'Jesus the man' and 'the divine Logos' in ways that Cyril thought were too dichotomous, widening the ontological gap between man and God in a way that would annihilate the person of Christ.

The main issue that prompted this dispute between Cyril and Nestorius was the question which arose at the Council of Constantinople: What exactly was the being to which Mary gave birth? Cyril posited that the composition of the Trinity consisted of one divine essence (ousia) in three distinct realities (hypostases.) These distinct realities were the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit. Before the Son became flesh in Mary's womb, Cyril asserted that there existed two natures of the Son—one divine nature and one human nature. Then, when the Son became flesh and entered into the world, these two divine and human natures both remained but became united in the person of Jesus. This resulted in the slogan "One Nature united out of two" being used to encapsulate the theological position of this Alexandrian bishop.

According to Cyril's theology, there were two states for the Son: the state that existed prior to the Son (or Word/Logos) becoming enfleshed in the person of Jesus and the state that actually became enfleshed. Thus, only the Logos incarnate suffered and died on the Cross and therefore the Son was able to suffer without suffering. Cyril's concern was that there needed to be continuity of the divine subject between the Logos and the incarnate Word—and so in Jesus Christ the divine Logos was really present in the flesh and in the world.

Mariology

Cyril of Alexandria became noted in Church history, because of his spirited fight for the title “Theotokos” during the Council of Ephesus (431). His writings include the homily given in Ephesus and several other sermons.[20]. Some of his alleged homilies are in dispute as to his authorship. In several writings, Cyril focuses on the love of Jesus to his mother. On the Cross, he overcomes his pain and thinks of his mother. At the wedding in Cana, he bows to her wishes. The overwhelming merit of Cyril of Alexandria is the cementation of the centre of dogmatic mariology for all times. Cyril is credited with creating a basis for all other mariological developments through his teaching of the blessed Virgin Mary, as the Mother of God.

Legacy

Cyril was a scholarly archbishop and a prolific writer. In the early years of his active life in the Church he wrote several exegeses. Among these were: Commentaries on the Old Testament[21], Thesaurus, Discourse Against Arians, Commentary on St. John's Gospel[22], and Dialogues on the Trinity. In 429 as the Christological controversies increased, his output of writings was that which his opponents could not match. His writings and his theology have remained central to tradition of the Fathers and to all Orthodox to this day.

In modern literature

Cyril plays a controversial role in the ArabicnovelAzazeel (also transliterated as Azazil) by the Egyptian scholar Youssef Ziedan. The novel, which won the 2009 International Prize for Arabic Fiction and will be published in English under the title Beelzebub, is set in 5th-century Egypt and Syria and deals with the early history of Christianity. The book has generated controversy for depicting religious fanaticism and mob violence among early Christians in Roman Egypt. The narrator, Hypa, witnesses the lynching of Hypatia and finds himself involved in the schism of 431, when Cyril deposed Nestorius. Cyril is portrayed as a fanatic who kills Jews and others who have not converted to Christianity from the traditional religions of antiquity These exaggerated claims have angered many Christians. Many believe Cyril was not as anti-Jewish as the book claims. This has led to numerous book burnings.[23]

Cyril has also been portrayed in a highly charged way in Ki Longfellow's Flow Down Like Silver, Hypatia of Alexandria[1] . Though Longfellow does not accuse Cyril of ordering the death of Hypatia, her work does not shy away from speculating on his part in the murder.

In film

In the 2009 filmAgora, Cyril is played by Sami Samir as an extremist that opposes Orestes's attempts to harmonize the different communities of Alexandria.

From BibleWiki

Doctor of the Church. St. Cyril has his feast in the Western
Church on the 28th of January; in the Greek Menaea it is found on
the 9th of June, and (together with St. Athanasius) on the 18th of
January.

He seems to have been of an Alexandrian family and was the son
of the brother of Theophilus, Patriarch of Alexandria; if he is the
Cyril addressed by Isidore of Pelusium in Ep. xxv of Bk. I, he was
for a time a monk. He accompanied Theophilus to Constantinople when
that bishop held the "Synod of the Oak" in 402 and deposed St. John
Chrysostom. Theophilus died 15 Oct., 412, and on the 18th Cyril
was consecrated his uncle's successor, but only after a riot
between his supporters and those of his rival Timotheus. Socrates
complains bitterly that one of his first acts was to plunder and
shut the churches of the Novatians. He also drove out of Alexandria
the Jews, who had formed a flourishing community there since
Alexander the Great. But they had caused tumults and had massacred
the Christians, to
defend whom Cyril himself assembled a mob. This may have been the
only possible defence, since the Prefect of Egypt, Orestes, who was
very angry at the expulsion of the Jews was also jealous of the
power of Cyril, which certainly rivaled his own. Five hundred monks
came down from Nitria to defend the patriarch. In a disturbance
which arose, Orestes was wounded in the head by a stone thrown by a
monk named Ammonius. The prefect had Ammonius tortured to death,
and the young and fiery patriarch honoured his remains for a time
as those of a martyr. The Alexandians were always riotous as we
learn from Socrates (VII, vii) and from St. Cyril himself (Hom. for
Easter, 419). In one of these riots, in 422, the prefect Callistus
was killed, and in another was committed the murder of a female
philosopher Hypatia, a highly-respected teacher of neo-Platoism, of
advanced age and (it is said) many virtues. She was a friend of
Orestes, and many believed that she prevented a reconciliation
between the prefect and patriarch. A mob led by a lector, named
Peter, dragged her to a church and tore her flesh with potsherds
till she died. This brought great disgrace, says Socrates, on the
Church of Alexandria and on its bishop; but a lector at Alexandria
was not a cleric (Scr., V, xxii), and Socrates does not suggest
that Cyril himself was to blame. Damascius, indeed, accuses him,
but he is a late authority and a hater of Christians.

Theophilus, the persecutor of Chrysostom,
had not the privilege of communion with Rome from that saint's
death, in 406, until his own. For some years Cyril also refused to
insert the name of St.
Chrysostom in the diptychs of his Church, in spite of the
requests of Chrysostom's
supplanter, Atticus. Later he seems to have yielded to the
representations of his spiritual father, Isisdore of Pelusium
(Isid., Ep. I, 370). Yet even after the Council of Ephesus that
saint still found something to rebuke in him on this matter (Ep. I,
310). But at last Cyril seems to have long since been trusted by
Rome.

It was in the winter of 427-28 that the Antiochene Nestorius
became Patriarch of Constantinople. His heretical teaching soon
became known to Cyril. Against him Cyril taught the use of the term
Theotokus in his Paschal letter for 429 and in a letter to
the monks of Egypt. A correspondence with Nestorius followed, in a
more moderate tone than might have been expected. Nestorius sent
his sermons to Pope Celestine, but he received no reply, for the
latter wrote to St. Cyril for further information. Rome had taken
the side of St. John
Chrysostom against Theophilus, but had neither censured the
orthodoxy of the latter, nor consented to the patriarchal powers
exercised by the bishops of Constantinople. To St. Celestine Cyril
was not only the first prelate of the East, he was also the
inheritor of the traditions of Athanasius and Peter. The pope's
confidence was not misplaced. Cyril had learnt prudence. Peter had
attempted unsuccessfully to appoint a Bishop of Constantinople;
Theophilus had deposed another. Cyril, though in this case
Alexandria was in the right, does not act in his own name, but
denounces Nestorius to St. Celestine, since ancient custom, he
says, persuaded him to bring the matter before the pope. He relates
all that had occurred, and begs Celestine to decree what he sees
fit (typosai to dokoun--a phrase which Dr. Bright chooses
to weaken into "formulate his opinion"), and communicate it also to
the Bishops of Macedonia and of the East (i.e. the Antiochene
Patriarchate).

The pope's reply was of astonishing severity. He had already
commissioned Cassian to write his well known treatise on the
Incarnation. He now summoned a council (such Roman councils had
somewhat the office of the modern Roman Congregations), and
dispatched a letter to Alexandria with enclosures to
Constantinople, Philippi, Jerusalem, and Antioch. Cyril is to take
to himself the authority of the Roman See and to admonish Nestorius
that unless he recants within ten days from the receipt of this
ultimatum, he is separated from "our body" (the popes of the day
had the habit of speaking of the other churches as the members, of
which they are the head; the body is, of course the Catholic
Church). If Nestorius does not submit, Cyril is to "provide for"
the Church of Constantinople. Such a sentence of excommunication
and deposition is not to be confounded with the mere withdrawal of
actual communion by the popes from Cyril himself at an earlier
date, from Theophilus, or, in Antioch, from Flavian or Meletius. It
was the decree Cyril has asked for. As Cyril had twice written to
Nestorius, his citation in the name of the pope is to be counted as
a third warning, after which no grace is to be given.

St. Cyril summoned a council of his suffragans, and composed a
letter which were appended twelve propositions for Nestorius to anathematize. The
epistle was not conciliatory, and Nestorius may well have been
taken aback. The twelve propositions did not emanate from Rome, and
were not equally clear; one or two of them were later among the
authorities invoked by the Monophysite heretics in their own
favour. Cyril was the head of the rival theological school to that
of Antioch, where Nestorius had studied, and was the hereditary
rival of the Constantinopolitan would-be patriarch. Cyril wrote
also to John, Patriarch of Antioch, informing him of the facts, and
insinuating that if John should support his old friend Nestorius,
he would find himself isolated over against Rome, Macedonia, and
Egypt. John took the hint and urged Nestorius to yield. Meanwhile,
in Constantinople itself large numbers of the people held aloof
from Nestorius, and the Emperor Theodosius II had been persuaded to
summon a general council to meet at Ephesus. The imperial letters
were dispatched 19 November, whereas the bishops sent by Cyril
arrived at Constantinople only on 7 December. Nestorius, somewhat
naturally, refused to accept the message sent by his rival, and on
the 13th and 14th of December preached publicly against Cyril as a
calumniator, and as having used bribes (which was probably as true
as it was usual); but he declared himself willing to use the word
Theotokos. These sermons he sent to John of Antioch, who
preferred them to the anathematizations of
Cyril. Nestorius, however, issued twelve propositions with appended
anathemas. If Cyril's
propositions might be might be taken to deny the two natures in
Christ, those of Nestorius hardly veiled his belief in two distinct
persons. Theodoret urged John yet further, and wrote a treatise
against Cyril, to which the latter replied with some warmth. He
also wrote an "Answer" in five books to the sermons of
Nestorius.

As the fifteenth-century idea of an oecumenical council superior
to the pope had yet to be invented, and there was but one precedent
for such an assembly, we need not be surprised that St. Celestine
welcomed the initiative of the emperor, and hoped for peace through
the assembly. (See EPHESUS, COUNCIL OF.) Nestorius found the
churches of Ephesus closed to him, when he arrived with the
imperial commissioner, Count Candidian, and his own friend, Count
Irenaeus. Cyril came with fifty of his bishops. Palestine, Crete,
Asia Minor, and Greece added their quotient. But John of Antioch
and his suffragans were delayed. Cyril may have believed, rightly
or wrongly, that John did not wish to be present at the trial of
his friend Nestorius, or that he wished to gain time for him, and
he opened the council without John, on 22 June, in spite of the
request of sixty-eight bishops for a delay. This was an initial
error, which had disastrous results.

The legates from Rome had not arrived, so that Cyril had no
answer to the letter he had written to Celestine asking "whether
the holy synod should receive a man who condemned what it preached,
or, because the time of delay had elapsed, whether the sentence was
still in force". Cyril might have presumed that the pope, in
agreeing to send legates to the council, intended Nestorius to have
a complete trial, but it was more convenient to assume that the
Roman ultimatum had not been suspended, and that the council was
bound by it. He therefore took the place of president, not only as
the highest of rank, but also as still holding the place of
Celestine, though he cannot have received any fresh commission from
the pope. Nestorius was summoned, in order that he might explain
his neglect of Cyril's former monition in the name of the pope. He
refused to receive the four bishops whom the council sent to him.
Consequently nothing remained but formal procedure. For the council
was bound by the canons to depose Nestorius for contumacy,
as he would not appear, and by the letter of Celestine to
condemn him for heresy, as he had not recanted. The correspondence
between Rome, Alexandria, and Constantinople was read, some
testimonies where read from earlier writers show the errors of
Nestorius. The second letter of Cyril to Nestorius was approved by
all the bishops. The reply of Nestorius was condemned. No
discussion took place. The letter of Cyril and the ten anathemaizations
raised no comment. All was concluded at one sitting. The council
declared that it was "of necessity impelled" by the canons and by
the letter of Celestine to declare Nestorius deposed and excommunicated.
The papal legates, who had been detained by bad weather, arrived on
the 10th of July, and they solemnly confirmed the sentence by the
authority of St. Peter, for the refusal of Nestorius to appear had
made useless the permission which they brought from the pope to
grant him forgiveness if he should repent. But meanwhile John of
Antioch and his party had arrived on the 26th and 27th of June.
They formed themselves into a rival council of forty-three bishops,
and deposed Memnon, Bishop of Ephesus, and St. Cyril, accusing the
latter of Apollinarianism and even of Eunomianism. Both parties now
appealed to the emperor, who took the amazing decision of sending a
count to treat Nestorius, Cyril, and Memnon as being all three
lawfully deposed. They were kept in close custody; but eventually
the emperor took the orthodox view, though he dissolved the
council; Cyril was allowed to return to his diocese, and Nestorius
went into retirement at Antioch. Later he was banished to the Great
Oasis of Egypt.

Meanwhile Pope Celestine was dead. His successor, St. Sixtus
III, confirmed the council and attempted to get John of Antioch
to anathematize
Nestorius. For some time the strongest opponent of Cyril was
Theodoret, but eventually he approved a letter of Cyril to Acacius
of Berhoea. John sent Paul, Bishop of Emesa, as his plenipotentiary
to Alexandria, and he patched up reconciliation with Cyril. Though
Theodoret still refused to denounce the defence of Nestorius, John
did so, and Cyril declared his joy in a letter to John. Isidore of
Pelusium was now afraid that the impulsive Cyril might have yielded
too much (Ep. i, 334). The great patriarch composed many further
treatises, dogmatic letters, and sermons. He died on the 9th or the
27th of June, 444, after an episcopate of nearly thirty-two
years.

St. Cyril as a theologian

The principal fame of St. Cyril rests upon his defence of
Catholic doctrine against Nestorius. That heretic was undoubtedly
confused and uncertain. He wished, against Apollinarius, to teach
that Christ was a perfect man, and he took the denial of a human
personality in Our Lord to imply
an Apollinarian incompleteness in His Human Nature. The union of
the human and the Divine natures was therefore to Nestorius an
unspeakably close junction, but not a union in one
hypostasis. St. Cyril taught the personal, or
hypostatic, union in the plainest terms; and when his
writings are surveyed as a whole, it becomes certain that he always
held the true view, that the one Christ has two perfect and
distinct natures, Divine and human. But he would not admit two
physeis in Christ, because he took physis to
imply not merely a nature but a subsistent (i.e. personal) nature.
His opponents misrepresented him as teaching that the Divine person
suffered, in His human nature; and he was constantly accused of
Apollinarianism. On the other hand, after his death Monophysitism
was founded upon a misinterpretation of his teaching. Especially
unfortunate was the formula "one nature incarnate of God the Word"
(mia physis tou Theou Logou sesarkomene), which he took
from a treatise on the Incarnation which he believed to be by his
great predecessor St. Athanasius. By this phrase he intended simply
to emphasize against Nestorius the unity of Christ's Person;
but the words in fact expressed equally the single Nature taught by
Eutyches and by his
own successor Diascurus. He brings out admirably the necessity of
the full doctrine of the humanity to God, to explain the scheme
of the redemption of man. He argues that the flesh of Christ is
truly the flesh of God, in that it is
life-giving in the Holy Eucharist. In the richness and depth of his
philosophical and devotional treatment of the Incarnation we
recognize the disciple of Athanasius. But the precision of his
language, and perhaps of his thought also, is very far behind that
which St. Leo
developed a few years after Cyril's death.

Cyril was a man of great courage and force of character. We can
often discern that his natural vehemence was repressed and
schooled, and he listened with humility to the severe admonitions
of his master and advisor, St. Isidore. As a theologian, he is one
of the great writers and thinkers of early times. Yet the troubles
that arose out of the Council of Ephesus were due to his impulsive
action; more patience and diplomacy might possibly even have
prevented the vast Nestorian sect from arising at all. In spite of
his own firm grasp of the truth, the whole of his patriarch fell
away, a few years after his time, into a heresy based on his
writings, and could never be regained by the Catholic Faith. But he
has always been greatly venerated in the Church. His letters,
especially the second letter to Nestorius, were not only approved
by the Council of Ephesus, but by many subsequent councils, and
have frequently been appealed to as tests of orthodoxy. In the East
he was always honoured as one of the greatest of the Doctors. His
Mass and Office as a Doctor of the Church were approved by Leo XIII in
1883.

His writings

The exegetical works of St. Cyril are very numerous. The
seventeen books "On Adoration in Spirit and in Truth" are an
exposition of the typical and spiritual nature of the Old Law. The
Glaphyra or "brilliant", Commentaries on Pentateuch are of
the same nature. Long explanations of Isaias and of the minor
Prophets give a mystical interpretation after the Alexandrian
manner. Only fragments are extant of other works on the Old
Testament, as well as of expositions of Matthew, Luke, and some of
the Epistles, but of that of St. Luke much is preserved in a Syriac
version. Of St. Cyril's sermons and letters the most interesting
are those which concern the Nestorian controversy. Of a great
apologetic work in the twenty books against Julian the Apostate ten
books remain. Among his theological treatises we have two large
works and one small one on the Holy Trinity, and a number of
treatises and tracts belonging to the Nestorian controversy.